1 / 28

Review of Annex 1 of the GLWQA

Limno-Tech, Inc. Environmental Engineering. Review of Annex 1 of the GLWQA. March 21, 2001 Workshop Ann Arbor, Michigan. Prepared for: Parties Implementation Work Group Science Advisory Board, IJC. Outline. Objectives of Review Presentation of Approach and Findings Issues to Resolve.

xenon
Download Presentation

Review of Annex 1 of the GLWQA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Limno-Tech, Inc. Environmental Engineering Review of Annex 1 of the GLWQA March 21, 2001 Workshop Ann Arbor, Michigan Prepared for: Parties Implementation Work Group Science Advisory Board, IJC

  2. Outline • Objectives of Review • Presentation of Approach and Findings • Issues to Resolve

  3. Objectives of Review • Compile information on: • Status of the Great Lakes relative to chemicals listed in Annex 1 • Relationship of current policy values to Specific Objectives • Conceptual basis and rationale for current policy values • How each agency assesses compliance with their policy values for open waters of the Great Lakes

  4. Caveat • Not exhaustive compilation of all data available • Data do not represent comprehensive spatial or temporal coverage • Data were assumed to meet QA/QC requirements • Did not interview every agency with a regulatory mandate in the Great Lakes • Comments related to key omissions are welcomed - Report is a draft

  5. Annex 1 Specific Objectives I. Chemical • Persistent Toxic Substances • Organic • Inorganic • Non-Persistent Toxic Substances • Organic • Inorganic • Other Substances II. Physical III. Microbiological IV. Radiological

  6. Persistent Toxic Substances; Organic

  7. Persistent Toxic Substances; Inorganic

  8. Non-Persistent Toxic Substances and Other Substances

  9. Comparison to Most Recent Field Data • Screening-level comparison of current (past 5 years) representative data • Selected data for open water only • Selected data that are representative and sufficient to make comparisons (=, <, >) • Contacted primarily federal agencies that monitor open waters • Obtained data for same media as objective (water, whole fish, edible fish)

  10. Criteria for Selection of Data • Water • Data usually available for each lake from one source • Fish • Selected adult top predator species preferentially • Lake Trout (Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, Ontario) • Walleye (Lake Erie) • Selected skin-on-fillet data preferentially over dorsal plug data because generally more conservative in data sets examined

  11. Primary Sources of Data • Water • U.S. EPA GLNPO • Environment Canada • Whole Body Fish Tissue • U.S. EPA GLNPO • Canadian DFO • State of Michigan • Edible Fish Tissue • U.S. EPA GLNPO • Ontario Sport Fish Contaminant Monitoring Program • State of Michigan

  12. Pesticides < Objectives in all lakes (with few exceptions) Metals < Objectives in all lakes Not all parameters monitored in all lakes Results of Data Comparisons Water

  13. Results of Data Comparisons Whole Fish • DDT+ in Lake MI > 1.0 ug/g (ww) • Mirex in Lake Ontario > DL • PCBs in all lakes > 0.1 ug/g (ww) • Mercury in all lakes < 0.5 ug/g (ww)

  14. Results of Data Comparisons Edible Fish • Aldrin/Dieldrin < 0.3 ug/g (ww) • Heptachlor/Heptachlor Epoxide < 0.3 ug/g (ww) • Endrin < 0.3 ug/g (ww) • Lindane < 0.3 ug/g (ww)

  15. Comparison to Current Policy Values • Definition of “policy value” - any criteria, standard guideline, or objective promulgated by agencies. • Policy values reflect: • Current knowledge base related to exposure and effects of contaminants in the environment • Interest in protecting human, aquatic, fish and wildlife use of water, sediment and tissue • Improvements in analytical methods since Annex 1

  16. Policy Values for Water • Unspecified • Some Annex 1 Specific Objectives • For the protection of aquatic life • Some Annex 1 Specific Objectives • Canadian Water Quality Guidelines • Ontario Provincial Water Quality Objectives • U.S. EPA Water Quality Guidance (GLI) and States • For the protection of human health • GLI and States • For the protection of wildlife • GLI and States

  17. Comparison of Policy Values for Water • Many inconsistencies between Objectives and policy values • Compared to policy values for protection of aquatic life, Objectives are often the lowest value • GLI criteria for protection of human health and wildlife usually lowest values overall • Some policy values for metals are hardness-dependent • Policy values have been promulgated for many substances not listed in Annex 1

  18. Policy Values for Whole Fish • For the protection of wildlife consumers • Annex 1 Specific Objectives • DDT, Mirex, PCBs & mercury for protection of fish-consuming aquatic birds • Canadian Tissue Residue Guidelines • DDT, PCBs & Toxaphene for protection of wildlife consumers of aquatic biota • Ontario Fish Tissue Residue Criteria • DDT & mercury for protection of fish-consuming birds and in the case of mercury, aquatic life • GLI and States • Water criteria for protection of wildlife derived from fish tissue triggers for DDT, mercury, PCBs, 2,3,7,8-TCDD

  19. Policy Values for Edible Fish Tissue • For the protection of human health • Annex 1 Specific Objectives for 5 pesticides • Uniform Sport Fish Consumption Advisory Protocol • PCBs • State trigger values, action levels or consumption guidelines • PCBs, pesticides, mercury, others • FDA Action Levels • PCBs, pesticides, mercury, others • GLI criteria for the protection of human health based on fish tissue triggers • PCBs, pesticides, mercury, others

  20. Sediment Quality Policy Values • Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines • Ontario Provincial Sediment Quality Guidelines • U.S. EPA Draft Freshwater Sediment Quality Criteria • New York State Sediment Criteria

  21. Procedures for Assessing Compliance • States and Ontario • Primarily focused on nearshore areas, efforts directed at effects of fish & sediment contamination • No systematic program to assess compliance in open waters • Federal Agencies • Environment Canada • Reviews data and flags parameters for which the 90th % value > most sensitive policy values in US & Canada • No formal reporting process • U.S. EPA • No systematic program currently in place

  22. Issues to Resolve – Data Management • Method of averaging data that contain censored values • Monitoring programs to use for compliance assessment • Spatial and temporal reference of data to use for compliance assessment (potentially lake-specific) • Definition of open water • Time of year to sample • Number of stations • Variations in sampling and analytical protocols • Analytical method for water • Whole fish versus edible • Species of fish and size

  23. Issues to Resolve - Policy • Use of both water and fish Objectives • Internal consistency (i.e., BAF) • Specification of fish “policy values” • Whole fish versus edible (ecosystem health versus human health) • Variation among agencies • Discrepancies between Annex 1 Objectives and Parties listing of parameters of concern • Parameters with “policy values”, but not listed in Annex 1 • Parameters listed in Annex 1 that are not monitored

  24. Policy Values for Parameters Not Listed in Annex 1 • Additional parameters • Canadian Water Quality Guidelines • 44 additional organic substances or groups • 5 metals • 5 other inorganic substances or physical properties • GLI and States • 11 additional substances • Tier II option (some states)

  25. Issues to Resolve – Policy • Conceptual basis for Objectives • Not specified for all parameters • Consistency with “policy values” • Variation among agencies • Consistency among Programs • Annex 1 Objectives • Lake-wide Management Plans (LaMPs) • Indicators in SOLEC process • Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy

  26. Contact Information Joseph DePinto jdepinto@limno.com Wendy Larson wlarson@limno.com Penelope Moskus pmoskus@limno.com Limno-Tech, Inc. (LTI) 501 Avis Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108 www.limno.com

  27. Keep 'Em Great!

More Related